# cannabis regulations

- Link: https://dearsouthafrica.co.za/cannabis-regulations/
- Published: 2026-02-23T11:43:49+02:00
- Author: dearSA

_Advert_

_Advert – scroll down_

![The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development invites you to submit
written comments on the draft Regulations under the Cannabis for Private Purposes
Act,](https://cdn.dearsouthafrica.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/23113020/Cannabis-
regulations-SM.jpg "Cannabis regulations SM")

![DEAR-SOUTH-AfFRICA](https://cdn.dearsouthafrica.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/
02/08135845/DEAR-SOUTH-AfFRICA.png "DEAR-SOUTH-AfFRICA")

0

comments individually delivered to the Government

       * No I do not support the regulations 1527
       * Yes I do 465
       * Not fully 634

### The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development invited written comments on the draft Regulations under the Cannabis for Private Purposes Act.

The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development has officially published
the long-awaited draft regulations to enforce the Cannabis for Private Purposes 
Act, 2024. Following the landmark 2018 Constitutional Court ruling that decriminalised
the private use of cannabis by adults, these new regulations finally set the specific
legal boundaries for how much cannabis South Africans can grow, possess, and transport.

[ view a report, all comments, documents and videos](https://dearsouthafrica.co.za/cannabis-regulations/summary)

## Have your say – shape the paper. [CLOSED] 

**Do you support the draft Cannabis Regulations as published by the Government? **

**What is your concern? (scroll down for an explanation of each point) **

As you've selected 'All of the Above', if you had to choose a top concern, what 
would it be?

the fields below are optional ——————————

**What is your preferred channel for feedback on this campaign?**

**Your preferred language?**

**What is your status? (for our reporting purposes only) **

 **Check your email address then hit send! You will be redirected to a confirmation
page. **

![D-icon](https://cdn.dearsouthafrica.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/11192438/
D-icon-40x40-1.png "D-icon-40x40")

### _Perspectives: What is the Debate?_

The publication of these draft regulations has sparked a fierce debate between the
government, legal professionals, and civil society.

_On one side_, the government and some industry bodies argue that these regulations
are a necessary, internationally benchmarked step to finally bring the Cannabis 
Act into enforceable law. They believe setting firm numerical limits is the only
way to end the legal “grey area” and provide clarity for both citizens and the police.

_On the other side_, cannabis activists, human rights groups, and civil society 
organisations argue that the Department of Justice is overstepping its bounds. They
argue that the regulations are actually stricter than the Act itself, re-criminalising
private behaviour through technicalities, arbitrary limits, and severe privacy violations,
particularly regarding the rules of transportation.

[Arguments in Favour (Supporters of the Regulations)](https://dearsouthafrica.co.za/cannabis-regulations/#1770892117175-dfc38055-c8385302-66e5)

Those who support the draft regulations as they stand argue the following:

    - _Legal Certainty and Protection:_ For years, the lack of defined limits meant
      that arrests were left to the subjective discretion of individual police officers.
      Supporters argue that setting firm limits (750g and 5 plants) provides absolute
      legal certainty, protecting citizens from arbitrary arrest as long as they
      stay within the thresholds.
    - _A Vital Step Toward Promulgation:_ Without these regulations, the Cannabis
      for Private Purposes Act remains largely theoretical. Supporters point out
      that finalising these rules is the mandatory final step required to remove
      THC from the strict narcotics schedule under the Drugs Act.
    - _International Benchmarking:_ The Department of Justice notes that the limits
      were developed by considering what reasonably constitutes private use, looking
      at the yields of cannabis plants, and aligning with international benchmarks
      for public safety.
    - _A Clear Path for Expungement:_ The regulations finally create a formal, timeline-
      driven administrative process to expunge the criminal records of thousands
      of South Africans who were historically marginalized and prosecuted for minor
      cannabis offences.

[Arguments Against (Opponents of the Regulations)](https://dearsouthafrica.co.za/cannabis-regulations/#1770892117205-3c7c32e1-ce3d5302-66e5)

Civil society groups, advocates, and opponents of the draft regulations raise several
serious concerns:

    - _Arbitrary Limits:_ Critics argue that the 5-plant and 750g limits are entirely
      arbitrary and lack scientific or agricultural backing. A blanket 5-plant limit
      fails to account for the massive difference between a small indoor plant and
      a large outdoor plant, or the fact that an annual outdoor harvest can easily
      yield more than 750g, instantly turning a legal home-grower into a criminal.
    - _Regulatory Overreach:_ Opponents argue that the regulations are legally flawed
      because they contradict and go further than the Act passed by Parliament. 
      By removing rights or adding restrictions that Parliament did not approve,
      critics argue the regulations are unconstitutional.
    - _Privacy Violations & “Police Drivers”:_ The transport rules—which force drivers
      and passengers to declare their cannabis to each other and grant drivers the
      power to inspect a passenger’s belongings—are viewed as a massive infringement
      on adult privacy. Critics argue it forces ordinary citizens to act like police
      officers.
    - _Vague Wording Invites Abuse:_ The regulations use vague terms regarding how
      cannabis must be “concealed” or prohibiting anyone from “revealing” it. Opponents
      fear this ambiguous language will be used as a loophole for law enforcement
      to continue harassing citizens and executing unwarranted vehicle searches.
    - _Disproportionate Impact on the Poor:_ The strict requirement to conceal cannabis
      in a vehicle’s boot or enclosed compartment disproportionately harms poorer
      citizens or rural residents who rely on public transport, communal living 
      spaces, or who do not own vehicles with lockable boots.

[ View more info](https://dearsouthafrica.co.za/cannabis-regulations/summary)
